I.

significance and characteristics of independence on August 15, 1947, the brightest gem on the crown of the queen of England fell, and a bright tricolor gear national flag flew high over the South Asian subcontinent.

From then on, the British colonial rule over India for nearly 200 years ended, opened a new chapter in Indian history, and India gained a new life.

India’s independence is the result of the long and arduous struggle of the Indian people.

According to incomplete statistics, since India became a British colony in 1757 to the famous national uprising in 1857, there have been more than 120 riots and uprisings among farmers, tribes and troops.

After the 20th century, the Indian national liberation movement has embarked on the road of leadership and organization from spontaneous and scattered struggle, and its scale and consciousness have been greatly developed and improved.

Since 1905, before the outbreak of World War II, India has experienced three climaxes of anti British struggle (1905-19081919-19221930-1934).

Major changes have taken place in the international situation since the Second World War.

The expansion of the democratic forces of the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe, the victory of China’s war of resistance against Japan, the climax of the independence movement in Southeast Asia, the weakening of the imperialist forces, especially the British imperialist forces, and the vacillation of its colonial status have given great encouragement and inspiration to the Indian people and set off a climax of the anti British independence struggle on a space-time scale.

In February 1946, a huge marine uprising broke out.

From the second half of 1946 to the second half of 1947, five large-scale peasant uprisings and movements broke out successively, including the peasant uprising in trengana, Hyderabad, India, the “tebaka movement” in Bengal, the struggle of Kashmiri farmers against British puppet autocracy, and the struggle of farmers in northern baraba and travanko.

From 1946 to 1947, the labor movement was at an all-time high, and the number of strikes in 1946 alone more than doubled that in 1945.

In addition, students, citizens and all sectors of the intellectual community have been involved in this unprecedented flood of anti British struggle.

The wave of the Indian people’s independence movement is unstoppable.

Facing this irresistible trend, the British colonial authorities faced two choices: one was to implement military repression and increase troops to maintain their rule, but the result would be to be completely driven away by the revolutionary people.

The other is to hand over political power and power to the colonial bourgeoisie in a dignified way in order to preserve part of its political and economic interests.

The British colonialists are famous for their tact and cunning, being at the helm of the wind and being good at compromise in the world.

Naturally, they adopted the latter strategy.

In February 1947, British Prime Minister Attlee issued a statement to transfer power to India.

In July of the same year, the British Parliament passed the Indian independence bill (i.e. Mongolia plan), which determined to end its rule over India on August 14 and 15, 1947 and establish two “autonomous dominions” of India and Pakistan respectively.

From then on, the Indian bourgeoisie officially took over the power of India.

On January 26, 1950, the Indian constitution came into force and the Republic of India was officially born.

The history of 40 years after independence has proved that Indian independence is a great victory of the national revolution led by the bourgeoisie, despite its weaknesses and defects.

In 1956, During his visit to India, the prime minister made the following assessment on the significance and characteristics of Indian independence: “under the leadership of the great and Prime Minister Nehru, the Indian people have won brilliant victories in the struggle for independence.

Our two countries have different paths to independence, but our common goals of safeguarding independence, building the motherland and safeguarding world peace are the same”.

India’s independence is of great significance.

India’s independence ended nearly 200 years of British colonial rule, basically completed the anti imperialist task politically, and opened a new era in Indian history.

Since then, the Indian people have taken control of their own destiny and are no longer at the mercy of imperialism.

Nehru solemnly declared on the eve of Independence: “Many years ago, we vowed to take charge of our own destiny.

Today, it is time for us to fulfill our promise, not completely, but basically.

When the clock strikes in the middle of the night, when the world is asleep, India will wake up to welcome life and freedom.

A generation of misfortune is over today, and India has rediscovered itself.”. India’s independence has opened up broad prospects and favorable preconditions for its development of national economy and culture.

After gaining political independence, the bourgeoisie in power can use its power to gradually surpass the national capital power and weaken the foreign capitalist power.

Use the state machinery to carry out land reform, weaken and even abolish the land ownership of big landlords, and open up the way for the development of capitalism.

Without independence and our own political power, there will be no changes in the 40 years after independence.

India’s independence is the turning point of India’s historical development.

India’s independence dealt a heavy blow to British imperialism.

India’s population of more than 400 million once accounted for three-quarters of the total population of the British Empire and nine tenths of its colonial population.

India is the main base for Britain to expand or dominate the world.

India’s independence made it lose its largest and oldest colony.

Therefore, it also lost its base and rear area on which it had been rich for a long time.

At the same time, India’s independence also greatly accelerated the disintegration of the whole colonial system.

The population of India ruled by Britain accounted for more than half of the total colonial population in the world.

Therefore, the establishment of the Republic of India had to deal a heavy blow to the imperialist colonial system all over the world, which became a major event of the national liberation movement in the East after the Second World War.

India is one of the earliest independent countries in Asia, Africa and Latin America after the Second World War.

Its independence can not but greatly promote the development of the national liberation movement in the vast areas of Asia, Africa and Latin America.

After independence, India appeared on the world political stage as an independent sovereign state.

It first advocated the non aligned foreign policy and jointly launched the non aligned movement with Egypt and Yugoslavia, playing an important role and influence in the world, especially in the third world.

As an independent power, India’s status and role in South Asia, Asia and even the world are no longer comparable before independence.

India’s independence was achieved under the leadership of the bourgeoisie.

It has different characteristics or weaknesses from the independence and liberation achieved by the leadership of the proletariat: first, India’s independence was achieved in the form of peaceful transfer of power.

First of all, this is the result of the Indian people’s long-term struggle to force the British colonialists to hand over their power.

But, on the other handRegime.

But in fact, India’s highest executive organ is the Council of Ministers headed by the prime minister.

The forty second constitutional amendment passed in 1977 clearly stipulates that “when exercising his powers, the president must act in accordance with the recommendations of the Council of Ministers headed by the prime minister.

” According to the constitution, the prime minister has the power to organize and lead the government.

All members of the Council of ministers are nominated by the prime minister and appointed by the president.

The prime minister also has the right to ask the president to remove a minister at any time, or even completely restructure the government.

The Indian Council of Ministers rarely meets, and the actual supreme executive organ is the cabinet composed of the prime minister and cabinet ministers.

The general reason is that the leader of the parliamentary party group of the majority party in the people’s house is the leader.

India’s successive heads of government, from Nehru to Desai, from Ying Gandhi to La Gandhi, have won the election with the support of some large consortia.

The vast majority of cabinet members are also representatives of the bourgeoisie and landlords.

For example, among the 18 members of the seventh British Gandhi cabinet, there were 14 industrial and commercial capitalists, rural capitalist landlords, rich peasants and others representing the interests of the bourgeoisie, accounting for 78%.

There is no doubt that the Indian government is just a bourgeois office.

All the above shows that Indian parliamentary democracy is no different from Western parliamentary democracy in form (such as electoral system, responsible cabinet system, parliamentary composition and power, etc.

) and in essence (the tool of bourgeoisie ruling the people).

But India’s parliamentary democracy is different from Western parliamentary democracy.

It has some characteristics of Eastern autocracy.

These include: (1) in addition to the common disadvantages of the parliamentary system in general western countries (such as malpractice, politicians’ speculation, etc.

), the Indian parliamentary system also has greater defects.

First, in the eight general elections in India, only half of the voters directly participated in the elections, w to less than half.

The first general election (1952) accounted for only 45.

7% of the voters, and the second general election (1957) accounted for 47.8%. Generally, the number of people who directly voted for the National Congress party did not vote accounted for half of the total number.

According to this calculation, the number of people supporting the National Congress party was less than one quarter of the total number of voters.

If you add the fraud in the election, the people who really support the Congress party are quite weak.

Second, the number of votes is not consistent with the interests of the seats.

There is often a “miracle” that a political party can obtain an absolute majority with a few votes.

Although members of the house of people of India are directly elected, they take a relative majority system in the house of people.

As long as the votes can lead, they can be elected.

In the first to fifth general elections, the Congress Party’s average number of votes accounted for 44% of the votes cast, less than half, while the average number of seats accounted for 69%, accounting for more than two-thirds.

In the seventh general election (1980), the Congress Party headed by British Gandhi won only 42% of the total votes, but 65% of the total seats.

On the contrary, all factions of the former people’s party accounted for 32% of the votes, but only 16% of the seats.

Third, the Indian constitution has been amended many times, and the judicial authority has been greatly weakened, while the administrative and legislative authority has been infinitely expanded.

In fact, India’s “separation of powers” is “integration of three powers” in many cases.

(2) the Indian government is basically controlled by the Nehru family.

In the 40 years since India’s independence, Nehru has been in power for 17 years, Ying Gandhi has been in power for 14 years, and RA Gandhi has been in power since the end of 1984.

Although there are shaistry and Desai in the middle, they are only four years together.

Therefore, in fact, the Indian government is in power by the Nehru family, and almost all major decisions of the Indian party and government are made by one person.

This is the so-called “strong man politics”.

This kind of politics is obviously inferior to Western democracy.

(3) the rule of violence is stronger than that of the West.

If India’s parliamentary democracy is relatively developed in the third world, it is also famous for its violent rule.

It can be said that parliamentary democracy and violent rule complement each other.

In the 13 years from the beginning of India’s independence to the end of the 1950s, police shootings exceeded the period of British rule.

From 1950 to 1978, police expenditure surged from 30 million rupees to 421.

8 billion rupees, an increase of more than 140 times.

Many prisoners were secretly executed without any legal trial and tortured in prison.

In Bihar, 87 cases of police cutting out prisoners’ eyes have been exposed.

In the mid-1970s, there was a crisis in the one party rule of the Congress party, so Ying Gandhi implemented a “state of emergency” in China.

On the one hand, the constitution has been amended many times to limit judicial authority, on the other hand, the opposition and the people have been suppressed on an unprecedented scale.

According to statistics, during the “state of emergency” in 1975, about 150000 people were arrested or detained in accordance with the “law on safeguarding domestic security” and the “Indian National Defense Law”, 26 political parties and organizations were banned, press censorship was carried out, domestic public opinion was suppressed, and citizens’ basic rights were deprived.

Indian scholar Mohan ram commented: “the most similar regulation to the emergency regulations in the Indian constitution is the Weimar constitution of the Third Reich of Germany.

Compared with Article 48 of the Weimar constitution, the Indian constitution is actually more powerful”.

Britain’s New Statesman reported that India, the world’s most populous democracy, has become an out and out Latin American police country.

These statements may be, but they can somehow reflect the limitations and hypocrisy of India’s democratic system.

(II) reforming the civil service system.

The implementation of the civil service system is an important feature of India’s parliamentary democracy.

India is one of the first countries in the world to implement the modern bourgeois civil service system.

The civil service system established by the British in India serves the interests of British colonialism.

At that time, there were only a few Indians in the civil service.

Until the eve of independence, almost all the most important positions in the civil service were occupied by the British.

After independence, with the departure of the British and the partition of India and Pakistan, a total of 451 civil servants remained in India.

They were all accepted by the Indian government and reused.

However, the past civil service system could not meet the needs of political power construction and socio-economic development after independence in terms of quantity, structure and legal procedures.

Therefore, after independence, the Indian government has carried out some reform and reconstruction of the civil service system.

(1) adjust the civil service structure and change the original “Indian civil service” (ICS) to “Indian executive service” (IAS), but still use the civil service title.

In addition to retaining the original “Indian police agency”, it has also established Indian diplomats, Indian Central secretaries, Indian economic officials and more than 20 other specialized agenciesIndustry technical officer organization.

According to the ownership and use of civil servants, they can be divided into three categories: the first category: all printed civil servants.

It is a common civil servant between the Federation and the States, which is uniformly recruited by the Federal Public Service Commission and then distributed to the States.

They usually hold important executive positions in the Federation and states.

The second category: Central civil servants.

Some are non-technical civil servants, such as central secretaries, shorthand (assistants), clerks, diplomatic officials, economic officials, Statistics officials, audit officials, customs goods tax officials, railway officials, national defense accountants, first-class postal officials, first-class news officials and first-class income tax officials.

The third category: state civil servants.

Recruited, used and managed jointly by States or several States and usually assigned to tax and administrative positions in districts below the county level.

State civil service members can be promoted to Indian executive members after selection.

(2) enact a civil service bill.

In 1951, the “All India official law” was enacted, and then regulations and rules on examination, appointment, promotion, selection, internship, conduct, discipline and appeal, salary and annuity were formulated for Indian administrators and Indian police officers.

In 1956, the “central civil service law” and regulations and rules related to the central civil service were formulated.

According to civil service regulations, there are three methods of civil service appointment in India: the first is appointment through competitive examination.

The open competitive examination is held annually by the Federal Public Service Commission.

Indian citizens aged between 21 and 24 can apply for college.

About 55 per cent of first-class civil service vacancies are appointed directly on the basis of the results of such examinations each year.

Some second-class civil servants are also appointed in this way.

The second is appointment through promotion.

There are two main bases for promotion: one is talent and the other is seniority.

For positions above the middle level, it mainly emphasizes talent.

For low-level positions, age plus suitability is emphasized.

The third method is appointment through selection.

Members of non civil service organizations with outstanding talents and rich practical work experience can be appointed by the central government after being recommended by relevant departments and reviewed by the Federal Public Service Commission.

Their age is generally limited to 25 to 40 years old.

This method is also widely used in the appointment of scientific and technological personnel in various ministries.

(3) expand the ranks of civil servants.

In order to meet the large demand for civil servants after India’s independence, the “special appointment committee” was established in 1948 to urgently appoint a large number of new civil servants by means of selection and promotion.

In its report, the newly established Planning Commission in March 1950 stressed the need to absorb talents with higher education and special experience into administrative institutions.

A group of young officials must be selected in time to carry out extensive economic training.

The government should recruit people with expertise and experience from universities, finance, industry and other departments to fill senior positions.

The Committee believes that if this is not done, it will be difficult to achieve the five-year plans.

By the end of the first five year plan in 1956, the total number of civilian personnel of the central government had reached 1792000 (including 1 million railway workers).

According to the statistics of Indian personnel and Administration Bureau from 1982 to 83, the total number of employees of Indian government in 1981 was 3227528 (excluding embassy personnel abroad, but including 1.

5 million railway employees), including 52773 first-class (equivalent to officials above section level in China) and 62955 second-class (chief and assistant officials), There are 1876784 third-class clerks and 1235016 fourth-class clerks, including cleaners.

(III) reorganize and rebuild the army and strengthen control over the army.

Before independence, the army was all controlled by the British.

The main officers in the regular army were British.

During the Second World War, the proportion of British and Indian officers was 4:1.

At that time, the army was purely a tool of colonialism.

At the beginning of independence, more than 10000 British officers still held important positions at all levels of the Indian army.

The highest number of Indian officers is brigadier general at brigade level, and there are only a few.

In order to change this situation, the Indian government has accelerated the process of Indian officers, that is, officers are gradually held by Indians.

In 1958, the staff of the navy was changed to Indian, and by 1961, the process of officer indosinization was basically completed.

In order to control the command power of the army, in 1948, the Indian government abolished the system that the commander in chief of the army was in charge of the sea and air force, implemented the separation of the three armed forces, the president was the supreme commander of the three armed forces, and exercised the command power of the army through the cabinet military committee chaired by the prime minister.

The real power was actually monopolized by the prime minister.

In order to prevent soldiers from interfering in government affairs, the Indian government has weakened the army’s certain autonomy in government decision-making by strengthening civilian management of the army.

The government stipulates that the Ministry of national defense is in charge of civil servants, the chiefs of staff of the three armed services are responsible to the Minister of national defense, and the finance of the army is under the direct supervision of the Ministry of finance.

In order to prevent soldiers from meddling in politics, the leaders of the Indian government have also timely transferred some prestigious senior generals who have close relations with large consortia of foreign forces.

Due to various strict preventive measures of the Indian government, the development ambition and accumulation of strength of senior officers have been restrained.

In the past 40 years, the Indian army has never interfered in politics, and the political situation is relatively stable.

This shows that compared with some third world countries, India’s parliamentary democracy is more mature and stable.

After India’s independence, various armies of British India (in addition to the regular army, local army, Turkish state armed forces, etc.

) were integrated into the regular army (excluding the local armed police).

The number of Indian troops increased from 275000 during the partition of India and Pakistan to 1.

26 million in the early 1980s.

Defense expenditure increased from 1.

64 billion rupees in 1950-51 to 125 billion rupees in 1986.

The military industry has become the second largest public industrial sector after the steel industry.

There are more than 50 arms factories, with more than 300000 people directly engaged in military production.

India can produce all its own light weapons and some can develop sophisticated weapons.

Since the 1980s, the weapons and equipment of the Indian armed forces have been updated for the second time.

There are more than 2100 tanks, ranking third in the world.

Nearly 1000 combat aircraft, ranking fifth in the world.

There are more than 150 ships of various types, ranking eighth in the world.

It has two aircraft carriers (the only country in Asia and Africa that has an air carrier).

A nuclear weapon test was conducted in 1974.

This shows that great changes have taken place in the construction of the Indian army, which has become the pillar of implementing the will of the bourgeoisie and implementing the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie.

(4) before independence, due to the British colonialists’ policy of “divide and rule” in India, India became a fragmented countryThe country divides Indians into British India and 560 States, divides nationalities of different languages into one state, and divides nationalities of the same language into several States, etc.

Therefore, the contradictions between places and between nations are extremely acute.

After India’s independence, the Indian government has taken a series of reform measures in dealing with issues such as nationality, language and land state.

From 1948 to 50, the Indian government merged the states through high price ransom and military coercion, and unified the grass-roots regime.

After 1956, the new provincial state system was implemented, which was basically divided into states by language.

By the mid-1980s, it had been divided into more than 20 states, which partially solved the contradictions between the central and local governments, nationalities and languages.

The state structure is federal.

The Indian constitution expressly stipulates that India is a federal state, which is composed of States and central regions (cities).

The political system of each state is almost identical with that of the central government, and each state has a Council of Ministers headed by the chief minister.

The chief minister is supported by the majority of the state assembly, and the Council of Ministers is collectively accountable to the state assembly.

The State Council is elected on the basis of universal suffrage and is generally elected for a term of five years.

Some states also have state senators, some of whose members are designated by the governor and others are nominated by members of the community.

The Senate is a permanent body that elects some members every two years.

Each state has a head of state, who is directly appointed by the president.

He has the power to dissolve the parliament, reconvene the parliament, deliver a state of the Union address, and issue orders during the recess of the legislative assembly.

The Indian constitution specifies in detail which are the authorities of the central government, which are the authorities of the state government, and which are the common authorities of the central and state governments.

The Indian Constitution stipulates that each state of India enjoys 66 legislative powers separately, including public order, police, local autonomy, public health, agriculture, forestry, fishery, education, local industry, land legislation, land and construction tax, luxury tax, etc.

The Constitution also stipulates 47 Legislative powers jointly enjoyed by the Federation and provinces and states, including criminal law, criminal procedure law, marriage law, property transfer, civil litigation, contract, trade union, labor welfare, labor disputes, economic and social plans, newspapers, price management, electricity, stamp duty, etc.

However, the autonomy of States is very limited.

This is reflected in: (1) in addition to the legislative power of the police and land, all major legislative powers related to the national economy and the people’s livelihood are concentrated in the central government.

According to the constitution, the Federation of India has sole legislative power over all the most important matters.

It includes 97 important powers such as national defense, armed forces, military industry, diplomacy, war and peace, aviation, railways, posts and telecommunications, foreign trade and foreign exchange, currency and banking, insurance and so on.

(2) Although the Constitution stipulates that states have the power to set up police, the police are sent to States after unified training by the Federal Ministry of the interior in accordance with the “All India police officer system”.

Promotion also needs to pass through the Ministry of the interior, so it is actually controlled by the Federal Ministry of the interior.

Amendment No.

42 of the Constitution also stipulates that the federal government has the right to send armed forces or other forces to any state to deal with serious problems such as social unrest and the deterioration of the legal system in that state.

During their stay in the state, these forces act on the instructions of the federal government and are not under the control of the state government.

(3) Although the Constitution stipulates 47 Legislative powers shared by the Federation and subordinate States, according to the constitution, the laws enacted by states can be effective only if they are not inconsistent with the laws enacted by the Federation, otherwise they shall be invalid.

(4) Although the Indian Constitution provides for the autonomy of several states.

However, the Constitution also stipulates that the executive power exercised by States shall not hinder or impair the executive power of the Federation.

Shall not impede or impair the executive power of the Federation to give instructions to states.

(5) The heads of states are appointed by and accountable to the president.

The Federation can grasp the overall situation of the state through the heads of States and contain the work of the state.

The Constitution also gives the governor “free decision-making power” on some issues.

When exercising this power, the governor may not have to follow the recommendations of the State Council of ministers.

(6) According to the constitution, the federal government has the right to collect all taxes, surcharges, customs duties, capital and property taxes, corporate taxes, railway passenger transport and freight taxes other than agricultural taxes as India’s “unified fund”, and then the Federation will distribute some of them or allocate them to states in the form of grants.

The central government controls the financial power of the States.

(7) The Constitution stipulates that the president has the right to declare a “state of emergency” when he believes that a state government cannot work in accordance with the constitution.

During this period, the Federal Parliament acts on behalf of the state parliament, and the president has the right to take over all the executive power of the state government and implement “presidential governance”.

From 1950 to April 1977, due to political turmoil and other reasons, the central government of India dissolved the State Councils of various states 50 times and implemented “presidential governance”.

(8) The Constitution stipulates that the Federal Parliament can establish new states or change the public offices, borders and names of existing states by a simple majority vote.

To sum up, India’s federalism undoubtedly has the characteristics of a strong unitary state.

The famous Indian jurist g.

Na Joshi believes that “strictly speaking, the Indian Federation is not a federal state, but a country with some major and important single factors”.

India’s official publication, India reference Yearbook, also believes that India’s federalism has the characteristics of a “unitary state”.

The reason why India’s state structure implements this federalism with the characteristics of unitary system is inseparable from India’s history, nationality and other characteristics.

India has suffered frequent invasions and conquests from different ethnic groups for a long time in history, resulting in a variety of Indian races, nationalities, languages and religions.

All major ethnic groups and most tribes in India have their own languages and scripts.

The Indian constitution recognizes 14 languages.

Each language group is essentially a nation.

Because of this situation, India did not form a centralized state before the British invasion.

Although there have been several major reunification in history, the time is very short, and India is mostly in a state of local separatism and division.

However, on the other hand, with the development of Indian capitalist factors, all ethnic groups in India have a strong desire to unite in the anti imperialist struggle.

All ethnic groups also have the trend of fighting to establish a national market, develop capitalism and establish a unified free state.

India’s anti British national liberation struggle and the struggle for economic independence after independence are the embodiment of this demand and trend.

After it came to power, the Indian bourgeoisie faced these two trendsPotential must be reflected in the national structure.

Considering the first trend, that is, the ethnic and linguistic situation of India and the desire of all ethnic groups for autonomy, federalism must be implemented.

Without federalism, India’s national characteristics cannot be reflected.

Taking into account the second trend, that is, to eliminate the old narrow local boundaries as much as possible and establish a unified country, we must put more emphasis on centralized leadership and management.

If we do not emphasize concentration, we may repeat the mistakes of local separatism in history, which is precisely a great obstacle to India’s national rejuvenation.

Therefore, the implementation of centralism under federalism is in line with India’s national conditions.

However, due to its own class nature and characteristics, the ruling Indian big bourgeoisie often makes mistakes and even implements great hindustanism and national chauvinism in dealing with the relationship between the central and local governments, unity and dispersion, and large nationalities and small nationalities.

(5) implement the political party system with the Congress party as the main body.

India is a country with many political parties, and its number can be the highest in the world.

According to the report of the Indian Election Commission, the total number of political parties in India was 192 at the first general election.

According to S.N. sadasi, an Indian scholar, there were more than 200 political parties in India from 1947 to 1977.

This phenomenon of numerous political parties reflects the diversity of Indian society, economy, nationality, language, religion and local differences.

However, the core force that dominates Indian politics and controls the development of the political situation is the Congress party.

No political party can match it.

Since 1947, the Congress Party has been in power for more than two years (from March 1977 to January 1980).

In the eight general elections, except for the sixth general election (1977), they were dominant.

The first general election won 364 seats, accounting for 74.

7% of the total seats of the people’s Congress.

The eighth general election won 403 seats, accounting for 80% of the seats in the people’s house.

The Congress Party has generally taken the lead in all state parliamentary elections.

For example, in 1952, 22 seats were deducted from the state assembly, accounting for 68.

4% of the total seats of the state.

In 1985, Congress Party members won 1416 seats in the state assembly, accounting for 56% of the total seats.

All opposition parties cannot compete with the Congress Party nationwide.

In the first general election, the people’s Socialist Party became the largest opposition party in the people’s house, with 21 seats, accounting for only 4.

3% of the total seats.

It has only 202 seats in the state seats, accounting for 6.

1% of the total state seats.

In the second general election, the Communist Party of India became the largest opposition party, with 27 seats in the people’s house, accounting for only 5% of the total seats.

In the fourth general election, the Liberal Party became the largest opposition party, with 44 seats in the people’s house, accounting for 8.

4% of the total seats.

In the fifth general election, the Congress Party (Organization faction) became the first opposition party, but it has only 16 seats in the people’s house, accounting for 3% of the total seats.

In the seventh general election, the popular party became the second largest party in the people’s house, with 42 seats (later reduced to 33 seats), accounting for 8% of the total seats.

In the eighth general election, talugu Zhixiang Party became the largest opposition party, with 28 seats in the people’s house, accounting for 5% of the total seats.

Since independence, some political parties have been in power at the state level.

In the fourth general election in 1967, nine states were ruled by opposition parties.

Another time, after the eighth general election in 1985, nine more states were ruled by opposition parties.

For example, the Communist Party of India (Malaysia) is in power in West Bengal, Kerala and Tripura, the people’s party is in power in Karnataka, the village of Telugu party is in power in Andra, the All India anard ravida Progressive Alliance is in power in northern Tamil, and the akali party is in power in Punjab (the Congress Party government took over again in early 1987).

From the perspective of development trend, opposition parties are likely to increase in local governance.

However, judging from the overall situation, the strength of the opposition parties is far from being comparable to that of the Congress party.

There were 2 million members of the Congress Party in 1920 before independence, 17 million in 1950 after independence, and about 14 million in 1981.

The Communist Party of India, once the largest opposition party in the country, has less than 200000 members (1957-1958), while the Communist Party of India (Malaysia) has 270000 members (after 1980).

There is a great disparity in the strength between the Kuomintang and the Communist Party.

The profound reason why the Congress Party has almost always maintained the record of winners is that it is one of the oldest bourgeois parties in Asia.

It has led the national liberation movement in India for more than half a century from beginning to end, mobilized and organized the Indian people to carry out a massive anti British struggle, and finally achieved independence.

It has famous leaders of Congress party such as tirak, Mahatma Gandhi and Jawaharlal Nehru, who enjoy high prestige and reputation among the Indian people and political parties.

After independence, the Congress party was able to follow the historical trend and formulate a set of economic and political programs and policies conducive to India’s development according to India’s specific national conditions.

Therefore, it was widely supported not only by the majority of Indian bourgeoisie and landlords and rich peasants, but also by some workers and peasants, ethnic minorities, low-level castes and Dalits.

In addition, because the Congress Party has rich experience in political struggle and can tide over the political crises inside and outside the party again and again (such as 1967-1969.

1977-1980.

1984, etc.

), the development of Indian politics has continuity and relative stability.

The political turmoil and instability in a certain period of time have not caused serious losses to India’s political and economic development. III. economic development and Reform (I) overview of India’s economic development before independence, due to the long-term cruel exploitation and plunder of British colonists, the foundation of the national economy was very weak, and the main economic lifeline was in the hands of British monopoly capital, resulting in the decline of Indian agriculture, industrial stagnation and extreme poverty of the national economy.

After 40 years of development after independence, its economy has changed significantly.

India’s economy after independence can be divided into three stages of development.

The first stage: 1947-1956, that is, from India’s independence to the end of the first five year plan, is a period of economic recovery.

The partition of India and Pakistan not only caused great hatred between Hindus and Muslims, but also disrupted the already unbalanced national economy.

After partition, large cities and industries were distributed in India, while most of the raw material producing areas and grain producing areas were distributed in Pakistan.

According to statistics, 91% of major industries such as steel, jute and papermaking remain in India.

Pakistan produces 38% cotton and 80% jute.

This made India spend more money in the early days of independenceHuge foreign exchange imports jute, cotton and grain.

At the beginning of India’s independence, industrial and agricultural production decreased significantly.

The total industrial production index dropped from 108.

4 in 1948 to 105 in 1950.

Agriculture fell to 95.

6 in 1950-1951, and grain fell to 90.5. In order to change this situation, the Indian government formulated the first five year plan (1951-1956), which aims to improve people’s living standards and change India’s stagnant economic structure, so as to lay a solid foundation for future economic development.

Through efforts, the average growth rate of India’s national economy reached 3.

6% at the end of the first five year plan, exceeding the original target of 2.1%. Within five years, industrial production increased by 25% and agricultural production increased by 22.2%. According to the prices from 1970 to 1971, industrial production increased by 7.

4%, agricultural production increased by 4.

3% and national income increased by 3.

6% on average.

During this period, prices were relatively stable, and the real wages of factory workers returned to the pre war level (1939).

During the first five year plan period, the land reform of canceling middleman landlords was also implemented, and 40% of the cultivated land was transferred to small and medium-sized landlords and wealthy farmers, which alleviated the class contradictions in rural areas to a certain extent and promoted the development of agricultural capitalism in India.

The second stage, 1956-1966, is the decade of implementing the “Fifth Five Year Plan” and “third five year plan”, which is the formation period of India’s industrial system.

According to Nehru’s economic development strategy, India’s “Fifth Five Year Plan” and “third five year plan” emphasize giving priority to the development of heavy industry centered on machinery manufacturing industry.

During the two five-year plans, the state concentrated its investment in various heavy and basic industries such as electric power, metallurgy, mining, machinery manufacturing, chemical raw materials, oil extraction, kerosene, petrochemical industry and chemical fertilizer, thus forming a relatively complete industrial system.

After ten years of efforts, industrial production nearly doubled, and the total index rose from 136 in 1956 (100 in 1950) to 264.

4 in 1966.

The fastest-growing industrial products are mechanical equipment and durable consumer goods serving production.

Among them, machine tools increased by 21 times, internal combustion engines increased by seven times, power pumps increased by five times, generators increased by four times and household refrigerators increased by six times.

In addition, sugar and oil increased by 14% and 13% respectively, while machine spun cotton decreased by 15.2%. While actively developing state-owned enterprises, the Indian government also encourages private monopoly consortia and new industries built in cooperation with foreign capital.

The number of state-owned enterprises in India increased from 21 to 74, and the investment increased by 29 times, from 810 million rupees to 24.

15 billion rupees.

The investment of domestic and foreign monopoly organizations in India increased by 132.

5%, from rs.

4783 million to rs.

10693 million.

The total assets of India’s five largest consortia nearly tripled from rs.

4544 million in 1958 to rs.

13194 million in 1966.

In agriculture, Nehru’s strategy is to implement rural development plans and cooperatives.

The core of the former is to establish a set of Cooperative Council system to make it a basic economic and administrative unit in rural areas.

It is required to include all cultivated land into a wide range of development plans within ten years, implement an agricultural intensive cultivation plan under the advice of American experts, and focus on the use of high-yield varieties, chemical fertilizers, agricultural machinery and other modern technologies, so as to achieve the purpose of substantial increase in production.

However, the plan was basically not implemented at that time.

After Nehru’s death in 1964, the successor shaistri abandoned Nehru’s above-mentioned strategy.

During this period, industry doubled, while agriculture increased by only 14%, with an average annual growth rate of 1.5%. Moreover, agricultural production is very unstable.

There is a reduction in production every two or three years, and sometimes there is even a significant retrogression.

For example, the agricultural production in 1965-1966 was 16.

6% lower than that in 1958-1959.

Two consecutive years of famine from 1965 to 1967, coupled with the India Pakistan war in 1965 and the interruption of us aid, formed an economic crisis characterized by food panic, inflation, foreign exchange shortage and industrial production reduction.

The stagnation and retrogression of agricultural production have seriously affected the development of industry.

The third stage: from 1966 to 1984, that is, from the three annual plans through the “fourth five year plan”, “Fifth Five Year Plan” and “sixth five year plan” to the death of Ying Gandhi, the basic feature of this period is to adjust the economy, focus on the development of Agriculture and rely more on the market economy.

In the mid-1960s, India’s food panic, all food stocks were exhausted, and the rationing system was basically maintained by importing wheat from the United States, which deepened India’s dependence on the United States and the world bank.

With the support of the United States and the world bank, Ying Gandhi agreed to implement the “green revolution”, a new strategy for agricultural development.

In terms of industry, we will provide new opportunities for private investment at home and abroad, relax the industrial license policy, nationalize 14 major banks (with total deposits accounting for 56% of the country), and approve the new construction and expansion of monopoly consortia.

During this period, the proportion of investment in agriculture and energy power increased.

The proportion of agricultural investment increased from 20% in the third five year plan (1964-1969) to 23% in the fourth five year plan (1969-1974).

Investment in industrial enterprises fell from 20% to 18%.

During the sixth five year plan (1980-1985), the investment in agriculture accounted for 25.

4% (21.

7% in the Fifth Five Year Plan), the expenditure on energy and power accounted for 28.

1% (26.

2% in the Fifth Five Year Plan), and the expenditure on industry and mining accounted for 15.

4% (18.

7% in the Fifth Five Year Plan).

During the sixth Five Year Plan period, the growth rate of national income is expected to be 5.

2% and the growth rate of per capita income is expected to be 3.28%. After 40 years of development, India has made remarkable achievements in industry, agriculture, science and technology.

From 1950-1951 to 1984-1985, India’s population doubled from 359 million to 750 million.

According to the prices of 1970-1971, the gross national product increased from 174.

69 billion rupees to 612.

01 billion rupees, that is, an increase of 2.

41 times.

In the same period, the per capita national income increased from 466 rupees to 771.

5 rupees, that is, an increase of 65.56%. The average annual growth rate of GNP is 4.4%. India’s industry has made significant development and has established an independent industrial system that is beginning to take shape.

The self-sufficiency rate of industrial equipment has increased from about 10% in the early stage of independence to about 90%.

Most of the consumer goods in the domestic market are made in China, and can export complete sets of equipment for factories and power stations such as textile, sugar, steel and chemical fiber.

The total index of industrial production (100 in 1960) increased from 49 in 1950-1951 to 278 in 1980-1981, an increase of 4.

67 times.

Many products have multiplied.

Early independence and 1984-1985Compared with, coal increased from 33 million tons to 147 million tons, an increase of four times.

The power generation increased from 5.

3 billion kilowatts to 139.

9 billion kilowatts, an increase of more than 25 times.

Crude oil increased from 230000 tons to 28.

99 million tons, an increase of 133 times.

Steel ingots increased from 1.

472 million tons to 10.

81 million tons, an increase of more than 7 times.

India has also made remarkable achievements in agriculture.

The agricultural production index (with an average of 100 in 1969-1970) increased from 58.

5 in 1950-1951 to 135.

2 in 1930-1981, an increase of 1.

31 times, and the average annual growth rate was 1.

5 times that of the 25 years before independence.

From 1950-1951 to 1984-1985, grain output increased from 50 million tons to 146 million tons.

Cotton output increased from 517000 tons to 1.

4 million tons, Gansu from 70.

49 million tons to 17300 tons, and oil from 4980 tons to 131 million tons.

In terms of science and technology, it has not only changed the situation of heavy dependence on foreign technology in the past, but also exported industrial products and technologies to some countries in the third world and even some western countries.

India has reached a fairly high level in atomic energy, electronics, polymers and space technology, and has been able to manufacture aircraft, missiles, man-made satellites and atomic power stations.

Among them, the total power of four atomic power stations is 860mw, and 85% of the equipment is made by India itself.

In the late 1970s, the number of scientific and technological teams had reached 2.

32 million, second only to the United States and the Soviet Union, claiming to rank third in the world.

Scientific research expenditure increased from 47 million rupees in 1950-1951 to 12.

37 billion rupees in 1982-1983, an increase of 260 times.

Education has also made great progress.

The number of primary and secondary school students in China increased from 19.

2 million in 1950-1951 to 81.

1 million in 1984-1985, an increase of 3.

3 times.

Over the same period, the number of all Indian college students increased from 360000 to 3.

5 million, a nine fold increase, the number of universities increased from 27 to 150, the number of primary schools increased from 209671 to 520000, and the literacy rate increased from 16.

6% to 36.2%. Of course, India’s economy has encountered many problems and difficulties in the process of 40 years of development.

For example, the economic structure is not reasonable enough, the proportion of the national economy is sometimes unbalanced, the long-term use of industrial equipment is insufficient, the number of sick enterprises is increasing, the management of economic management, especially public enterprises, is chaotic, labor productivity is low, poverty and unemployment are serious, and polarization is expanding.

The Indian government seeks to promote the resolution of these problems.

Relevant questions can be found in part V.

(II) India’s mixed economic system and main economic components since its independence, India has always pursued the policy of simultaneous development of public economy and private economy.

The industrial resolution of April 1948 wrote: “in the coming period, the way for the state to increase national wealth is to expand various production activities that have been carried out before and concentrate on establishing other new production projects rather than accepting original enterprises.

At the same time, private enterprises can also play a very valuable role as long as they are in the right direction and properly adjusted.

” In 1956, the industrial policy resolution divided industries into three categories: the first category has 17 kinds, which are monopolized by the state, including weapons and ammunition, atomic energy, steel, heavy castings, heavy machinery, heavy electrical appliances, coal, petroleum, aviation, railway, shipbuilding, electric power and mining.

Private enterprises that have operated in such industries are still allowed to continue to operate.

There are 12 types in the second category.

The state establishes public enterprises and allows private economic enterprises to enter to supplement their deficiencies.

These industries include machine tools, drugs, synthetic rubber, road transportation and maritime transportation.

The rest belong to the third category and are left to the private sector.

Finance and foreign trade are controlled and operated by the public sector.

Both public and private economic sectors exist in the same society, have their own business scope and play their respective roles under the same plan.

The public economy is mainly concentrated in basic industries, heavy industry, transportation, arms industry, public facilities and important financial institutions with large investment, long turnover period and less income.

They developed rapidly through the Indian government taking over the original enterprises of the British colonial government, nationalizing private enterprises and state investment in construction.

They dominate and dominate the economic life of the whole country.

At the beginning of the first five year plan, there were only five centrally controlled public enterprises.

By the beginning of 1982, the number had increased to 203, an increase of more than 40 times.

The investment amount was 2.

9 billion rupees in 1951-1952 and increased to 265.

9 billion rupees in 1982-1983, an increase of more than 850 times.

The amount of investment accounts for 50% of the total investment of the national organized enterprises (industrial enterprises registered and regulated according to various laws and regulations of India) and 60% of the total production capacity.

It accounts for about 20% of the GDP, and the number of employees of enterprises accounts for more than 65% of the total number of employees of organized enterprises in China.

At the end of the 1970s, the number of public enterprises among the 100 largest companies in India has increased to 36, with total assets of 108.

83 billion rupees, accounting for 74.

3% of the total assets of the 100 largest companies.

Some public enterprises have been listed as “transnational corporations” in the world, such as Indian iron and steel Management Corporation, which ranks 20th among the 43 largest iron and steel trusts in the world.

Judging from the scale of the public economy and its role in the whole national economy, it has become the backbone to support the whole national economy.

In nature, it undoubtedly represents the production relations of state capitalism.

While developing the public economy, the Indian government also vigorously supports the development of private capitalism, especially the economic development of large consortia.

Although the Indian government has also taken some measures to restrict the development of private monopoly capital, such as the implementation of monopoly and trade act law, industrial license system, etc.

, generally speaking, support is the main, or small restrictions and large support.

In the consumer goods industry and construction industry of the private economy, commercial profits are generally relatively high, while the profits of public enterprises are relatively low due to large investment.

Moreover, the public enterprises provide all kinds of favorable conditions needed by the Liduan consortium, such as cheap raw materials, fuel, base facilities, machinery and equipment, transportation, water conservancy and electricity, etc.

As Ajit Roy said in his book “monopoly capitalism in India”, the public economy provides the most basic structure, and “the private sector is mainly monopoly capital to build its own magnificent buildings on this basic structure”.

With the support of the government and public enterprises, the monopoly consortia with strength has developed rapidly.

In 1851, there were only nine consortia with more than 200 million rupees.

In 1981, there were 100 consortia, including 44 consortia with more than one billion rupees and total assets of 151.

4 billion rupees.

The government of India has also taken a number of measures to supportAnd began to gradually operate capitalist farms.

In addition, due to the land reform legislation, allowing landlords to recover their land for “self employment”, which led to a climax of seizing tenancies.

Many tenants lost their land and became landless tenants.

Their number increased sharply, and a considerable part of them became agricultural workers with the nature of capitalism, which undoubtedly created another necessary condition for the development of agricultural capitalism.

The failure of Indian land reform lies in that it is not a revolutionary measure to eliminate the rural feudal system and implement “the tiller has his land”, so it is impossible to solve the land problem of Indian farmers.

The redistribution of land after the land reform was mainly carried out within the landlord class, involving at most a small number of wealthy farmers.

Only a small number of small and medium-sized landlords and wealthy farmers are able to pay the ransom for the expropriation of chaimingdar.

Landless and landless farmers are unable to pay.

After the land reform, the relationship between land owners and actual farmers has not changed fundamentally.

The failure of India’s land reform lies in that the other two items in the land reform have not been implemented except for the abolition of chaimindar land system.

The legislation of tenancy reform mostly remained on paper, and the landlords took advantage of the disadvantages of the law to increase the rent and seize the tenancy legally.

The land ceiling law also has little effect.

Its purpose is to try to solve the land problem of poor farmers and carry out rational land distribution.

In fact, the beneficiaries are only a small number of small and medium-sized landlords and wealthy farmers.

Landless and landless farmers also cannot get land because they are unable to pay compensation.

Since the mid-1960s, the Indian government has implemented the strategic policy of developing modern agriculture centered on technological reform, which is commonly known as the “green revolution”.

The main contents of this strategy include: (1) expanding irrigation and accumulation.

It is the core and key of the new policy.

India’s irrigation industry was relatively developed as early as the British rule.

At that time, Punjab in northwest India was known as the “world irrigation center”.

After independence, especially since the implementation of the green revolution, the investment and area of irrigation by the Indian government have been expanding.

Irrigation investment increased 32 times in the mid-1970s over the early 1950s.

The area of irrigated land increased from 22.

56 million hectares (17.

1% of the total sown area) in 1958-1951 to 52.

64 million hectares (30.

8% of the total sown area) in 1979-1980.

it reached more than 60 million hectares (35% of the total area) in the mid-1980s, more than double that in the early days of independence.

(2) Introduce, cultivate and popularize high-yield varieties.

At the beginning, the Indian government introduced high-yield varieties from abroad, established central and local seed research centers with loans from the world bank, and screened thousands of wheat and tens of thousands of rice varieties.

By the late 1970s, a number of high-yield and excellent varieties of wheat and rice had been cultivated, known as “magical seeds”.

Generally, it is two to three times higher than local varieties.

With the vigorous promotion of the government, the area of high-yield varieties expanded from 10000 hectares in 1965 to 25 million hectares in 1975, accounting for 31.

5% and 69.

6% of the sown area of wheat and rice respectively.

(3) Extensive use of chemical fertilizers.

In order to ensure the supply of chemical fertilizer, the Indian government has built a number of chemical fertilizer plants and imported a considerable amount of chemical fertilizer from abroad (about 40%).

The average amount of chemical fertilizer per hectare increased from 0.

5kg in 1952-1953 to 29.

8kg in 1978-1979, an increase of 59.

6 times.

(4) Improve the degree of mechanization.

In 1951, there were only 9000 tractors, with an average of 7 tractors per 100000 hectares.

By 1978, it had increased to 306700 tractors, with an average of 213 tractors per 100000 hectares, an increase of 34.

1 times.

The use of agricultural electricity increased from 1.

5 degrees per hectare in 1951 to 50 degrees in 1975.

Like land reform, the green revolution has both success and failure, but on the whole, it is basically successful.

In terms of productivity, the green revolution has increased agricultural growth rate and productivity, and greatly increased grain production.

From 1351 to 1965, the agricultural growth rate mainly depended on the expansion of cultivated area, with an average annual growth rate of 1.

7% and productivity growth of 1.4%. After the green revolution, from 1965 to 1979, the growth rate of agricultural output and productivity were 2.

6% and 1.

7% respectively.

Grain output was 89.

56 million tons in 1964-1965 and 130 million tons in 1978-1979.

From 1979 to 1982, it was 2.

17 times higher than that from 1949 to 1952, and wheat increased by 4.

6 times over the same period.

Due to the increase of food production, India has changed from a “famine country” to a “cause of surplus food”.

From 1960 to 1970, an average of 6.

5 million tons of grain were imported every year.

By 1978, not only grain imports were stopped, but also 1 million tons of grain were exported to some Asian countries.

The most effective green revolution was Punjab, Haryana and western Uttar Pradesh.

The commercial grain purchased by the government was mainly concentrated in these three states.

In 1977-1978, for example, the government purchased a total of 4.

8 million tons of wheat, and purchased 2.

81 million tons, 830000 tons and 700000 tons respectively from these three states, accounting for 98% of the wheat purchase volume.

78% of Punjab rice production and 91% of Haryana rice were sold to the state.

In terms of production relations, the green revolution promoted the development of agricultural capitalism.

After the development of the three revolutionary states in the northwest, it was considered that the green agriculture was dominated by capitalism, especially in the three revolutionary states in the northwest.

A large number of new agricultural capitalists and capitalist wage workers have emerged here.

Green revolution is to transform traditional agriculture from productivity through modern agricultural technology without changing the existing production relations.

There are still many problems, the most prominent of which is that the benefits of the green revolution are shared and absorbed by a very small number of emerging landlord classes and rich peasants.

They can use a large amount of funds to expand reproduction and obtain high profits.

The number of agricultural employees has increased greatly, and poor farmers continue to lose their land and are heavily in debt, which has exacerbated the polarization between the rich and the poor in rural areas.

Like land reform, the green revolution is a measure to serve the Indian bourgeoisie and the rich. IV. contemporary social nature from the introduction and analysis of the above two aspects of Indian superstructure and economic foundation, it is not difficult to see that after 40 years of changes, India’s social nature is no longer a colonial and semi feudal society before independence, but should be an independent capitalist society, but this society is different from the capitalism of contemporary western developed countries, It has many characteristics of its own.

The basic basis for affirming that India is an independent capitalist society lies in: (1) India is in politics, feudal land rent exploitation, especially the sharing system, is still the main form in many areas.

According to statistics, the sharing restriction accounts for 47% of all ancestral land, and the income of landlords is usually more than half of the farmers’ harvest.

In addition, private usury exploitation is still prevalent in India, coupled with religious superstition and caste system, which makes India more feudal.

In the superstructure, as mentioned earlier, although India implements Western parliamentary democracy, it is far less fully reflected than western countries in many aspects, with some traces of strong Eastern feudal autocratic system.

Third, India is a capitalist country that has a certain dependence on foreign countries.

Since independence, although India’s foreign investment and foreign aid have decreased relatively compared with its domestic capital, they have increased sharply in absolute terms.

In 1948, the total amount of foreign investment was 2.

56 billion rupees, and in 1982, it rose to 25 billion rupees.

In addition to the UK, the main investment countries include the United States, West Germany, Italy, France, Switzerland, Japan and so on.

It mainly invests in manufacturing (accounting for more than half), followed by service industry, oil industry, plantation industry and mining.

India is also one of the countries receiving more foreign aid.

From independence to 1984, India received a total of 364.

744 billion rupees of foreign aid (including 42.

06 billion rupees of compensation).

By the beginning of January 4, India’s total foreign debt had reached 123.

39 billion rupees, accounting for about 23.

8% of the gross national product of that year.

On average, each Indian had a negative foreign debt of 200 rupees.

Due to the continuous increase in the total amount of principal and interest payments, it is expected that India will pay more than US $1 billion in principal and interest to the international monetary fund every year from 1987 to 1992, so India will be trapped in paying off its old debts with foreign debt.

The Soviet Union and the United States are India’s largest donors.

By the end of the 1970s, US aid had reached US $11.

31 billion.

Most of the important raw materials and advanced technology and equipment needed by the Indian industry are imported from the United States.

Since 1955, the Soviet Union has assisted India with more than US $3 billion and built more than 70 projects.

The Soviet Union is also the largest arms supplier to India.

It has imported various modern weapons and equipment to India, with military assistance reaching more than $5 billion.

This large number of foreign aid can not but affect India’s economy, politics and diplomacy to a certain extent.

India has deviated from the non aligned policy for quite a long time, has discord or even war with some neighboring countries, and favors hegemonic countries on issues such as Afghanistan and Cambodia.

It has to do with the above foreign aid.

Fourth, India is a capitalist country that adopts certain socialist practices.

In 1955, the Congress Party of India officially adopted the resolution to establish a “socialist society” in India.

When the Congress Party commemorated its 100th anniversary in 1985, it continued to emphasize the need to implement socialism in India.

The socialism advocated by the Congress party is not the scientific socialism advocated by Marxists, but bourgeois nationalism.

It is some methods (mainly in the economic field) and methods adopted by the Indian bourgeoisie to meet their own needs in order to develop the national economy and consolidate the achievements of independence, To serve its eventual ascent to the ranks of advanced capitalist countries.

As Nehru himself said: “as far as India is concerned, as far as India’s current position is concerned, I really like nationalism.

Socialism will eventually have to push forward nationalism as a political cloak”.

Therefore, Nehru’s socialism is undoubtedly nationalism and capitalism in essence.

But this nationalism and capitalism are based on socialism.

Many practices are quite similar to socialism.

Among them, the most obvious is the implementation of the mixed economic system and planned economy with the simultaneous development of public and private economy.

Since its independence, India has implemented six five-year plans without interruption, and has implemented the seventh five-year plan since 1986.

This planned economy includes giving priority to the development of heavy and basic industries, while paying attention to the development of agriculture and light industry, so as to achieve self-sufficiency in grain and basic raw materials, national defense, technical forces and machinery and equipment.

The public sector implements planned production in accordance with the mandatory principle, and the private sector implements production in accordance with the guiding principle.

Eliminate unemployment and poverty.

Since the implementation of India’s planned economy, it has not brought fundamental changes to India’s capitalist production relations, and poverty and unemployment have not been fundamentally solved.

However, this socialist planned economy has indeed made some achievements.

The establishment and formation of a complete industrial system, the modernization of industry, agriculture, national defense, science and technology and the improvement of self-sufficiency rate all show that the socialist planned economy also has great power in India.

Fifthly, India will be a capitalist country that can transition to western developed countries after a long journey.

The development of Indian society undoubtedly faces two prospects: one is to implement a thorough Democratic National Revolution in India, that is, to establish a new type of people’s democratic regime under the leadership of the proletarian revolutionary party, completely abolish the landlords’ land ownership, truly solve the farmers’ other problems, and clear the obstacles to the development of socialism.

However, the current conditions for such a future do not exist.

Objectively speaking, there is no revolutionary situation, the ruling class can continue to rule as usual, and the people have not reached the point where they have to rise up and overthrow the current regime.

In terms of the subjective conditions of the revolutionary party itself, it is still in a state of fragmentation and weak strength, unable to lead the revolutionary struggle.

The other is to slowly develop capitalism along a painful “Prussian road” under the control of the existing bourgeois regime.

This future has become a reality and seems to be moving in this direction irreversibly.

Both internationally and within India have provided favorable conditions for this possibility.

India’s ruling bourgeoisie has the ability to take advantage of favorable conditions at home and abroad to develop and expand its own strength, and continue to develop in the direction of capitalism.

However, whether India can finally embark on and develop into a European and American style developed capitalist society is not easy, which will go through a long and even painful process.

This is because today’s India has a large population, weak material foundation, rural feudal or semi feudal production relations still dominate, religion and caste systems exist seriously, and ethnic and sectarian contradictions are extremely acute.

It is difficult to reach the level of western developed countries in a short time.